08-24-2017, 11:36 AM
(08-23-2017, 08:52 PM)trainspotter139 Wrote: As I've said earlier, Tom Galloway has said that the problem is no longer the assembly of the vehicles but rather the integration of the vehicle's computerized control systems with the signalling system chosen by Grandlinq.
I don't really buy that. It's probably just posturing for the upcoming negotiations with Grand Linq for the final bill on construction. He can claim that Grand Linq is partially responsible for the train delays and they shouldn't pay 100% for operation costs in the meantime.
He's not involved in the technical stuff, so he can say whatever he wants publicly and not be accused of lying, since that's what Bombardier told him. I doubt Grand Linq will take that claim at face value either, unless they are getting other concessions from the region (i.e. dome costs). Integration of a signal system should be able to be done on site, so the trains could be delivered in the meantime. It would also be beneficial for every party in the process if 98% functional trains can be delivered. It's in everyone's interest to avoid a lawsuit, and showing good will and progress will help that.
I'm not accusing Galloway of deceit or anything, but it seems someone at the region needs to filter the bull from Bombardier. Bombardier is clearly not being realistic about delays/causes, and it only looks worse when external media keeps breaking news about schedule pushes. As Jeffster mentioned, I think there will be consequences for some politicians because of Bombardier. Especially if they are seen as going to bat for Bombardier.